I may want one. Still available?
Can you post a pic of it mounted in the gopro? Can the 4 still fit in the waterproof case with the lens?
Dedicated 3rd Party Lens Discussion (Examples Updated)
- Thread starter pyrate
- Start date
Can you post a pic of it mounted in the gopro? Can the 4 still fit in the waterproof case with the lens?
I paid $49 for the 3.80mm lens for a single lens, if you buy 100 of them then the price is $29, I don't know how much for different quantities.
I also bought 2.70mm low-distortion lens for $59
4.3mm lens they offered me at $15 but I didn't take that one.
5.4mm was $95, same as 7.2mm, these were more expensive because the listed price was with no IR-cut filter, adding the filter on brought the cost up to $95.
3.80mm lens at $49 is already with the IR-cut filter, this is the best quality vs. price lens in my opinion, I'm blow away by this lens.
I'll be ordering few more of these as I don't expect them to be available for too long.
I've installed it in my GPH3+ and the 3.97mm in my GPH4 has to go now, I'll replace it with another 3.80mm
shipping from China to Australia was $30 by DHL Express.
for me yes, maybe just got a bad sample of 3.97mm, I'm gonna post some examples later from identical MPCC
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 125
- Reaction score
- 22
- Age
- 55
just some comparison photos from stock lens (H4black), 3.97mm lens (H4black), 3.80mm lens (H3+black).
I also have identical MPCC flights with 3.97mm and 3.80mm, I'll upload these later.
these photos are not modified, other than cropped, otherwise exactly how they came out of the camera. I have all 3 cameras set to protune, this works for video but with photos only H4 shoots in protune, the H3+ ignores the protune settings for photos it seems, so that picture is colorized, just ignore the colour information, I'm comparing clarity/softness.
Photos taken at 12MP, lens fitted with ND8/CP filter and all flights were taken 10 minutes apart so the lighting conditions were same/similar.
GP with stock lens was at Medium FOV, the other two at Wide FOV.
Full Photo
a) Stock lens
3.97mm lens
3.80mm lens
100% crop from the full resolution original image, targeting the tower at the top of the hill in the middle :
Stock lens
3.97mm lens
3.80mm lens
Bottom left area - checking for softness/distortion :
Stock lens
3.97mm lens
3.80mm lens
for me 3.80mm is so much better, even the stock lens seems slightly better than 3.97mm eventhough it's at medium FOV and as such using only small portion of the sensor.
I don't believe 3.97mm is this bad, this is probably just a bad sample that I got in my Peau82 GoPro.
I also have identical MPCC flights with 3.97mm and 3.80mm, I'll upload these later.
these photos are not modified, other than cropped, otherwise exactly how they came out of the camera. I have all 3 cameras set to protune, this works for video but with photos only H4 shoots in protune, the H3+ ignores the protune settings for photos it seems, so that picture is colorized, just ignore the colour information, I'm comparing clarity/softness.
Photos taken at 12MP, lens fitted with ND8/CP filter and all flights were taken 10 minutes apart so the lighting conditions were same/similar.
GP with stock lens was at Medium FOV, the other two at Wide FOV.
Full Photo
a) Stock lens
3.97mm lens
3.80mm lens
100% crop from the full resolution original image, targeting the tower at the top of the hill in the middle :
Stock lens
3.97mm lens
3.80mm lens
Bottom left area - checking for softness/distortion :
Stock lens
3.97mm lens
3.80mm lens
for me 3.80mm is so much better, even the stock lens seems slightly better than 3.97mm eventhough it's at medium FOV and as such using only small portion of the sensor.
I don't believe 3.97mm is this bad, this is probably just a bad sample that I got in my Peau82 GoPro.
Thanks much, Pete! That was a great example, pictures/examples do so much more for me than words!
Jerry
Comparison running simple MPCC.
First 2 videos are post processed, last 2 are raw as they came out of camera (only downscaled to HD 1080).
GoPro settings : 30fps, 2.7k Wide FOV, protune, raw/native WB, max ISO 400, EV -0.5, used ND8/CP filter
On the post processed versions I applied identical post processing with identical values :
- little bit of sharpening (this helped somewhat the 3.97mm lens)
- some stabilization
- applied free GP protune to Rec.709 LUT from Ground Control
- auto white balance
- graduated filter
Last 40 seconds in each video you can compare sun flare on both lenses, 3.80mm is more under control.
To downscale and compress for Youtube upload I used medium quality (7500kbps), this reduced the differences between the 2 lenses to some extent, at full resolution the quality difference is more obvious.
3.97mm shows overall softness which is more obvious in the bottom two corners (for example as the trees move through the frame), not just the softness but greater distortion in corners as well. Also less detail (at the beginning of the video in the center on top of the hill there is a tower, not even noticeable with 3.97mm lens).
I didn't do any manual colour grading and because I used auto white balance in post processing it seems it was applied differently (3.80mm is little bit warmer).
Btw. is there any pink cast in the 3.80mm videos ? It doesn't help that I'm colour blind, but I can't notice it. Does it normally show in the raw file or during post processing ?
3.80mm post processed
3.97mm post processed
3.80 raw
3.97 raw
First 2 videos are post processed, last 2 are raw as they came out of camera (only downscaled to HD 1080).
GoPro settings : 30fps, 2.7k Wide FOV, protune, raw/native WB, max ISO 400, EV -0.5, used ND8/CP filter
On the post processed versions I applied identical post processing with identical values :
- little bit of sharpening (this helped somewhat the 3.97mm lens)
- some stabilization
- applied free GP protune to Rec.709 LUT from Ground Control
- auto white balance
- graduated filter
Last 40 seconds in each video you can compare sun flare on both lenses, 3.80mm is more under control.
To downscale and compress for Youtube upload I used medium quality (7500kbps), this reduced the differences between the 2 lenses to some extent, at full resolution the quality difference is more obvious.
3.97mm shows overall softness which is more obvious in the bottom two corners (for example as the trees move through the frame), not just the softness but greater distortion in corners as well. Also less detail (at the beginning of the video in the center on top of the hill there is a tower, not even noticeable with 3.97mm lens).
I didn't do any manual colour grading and because I used auto white balance in post processing it seems it was applied differently (3.80mm is little bit warmer).
Btw. is there any pink cast in the 3.80mm videos ? It doesn't help that I'm colour blind, but I can't notice it. Does it normally show in the raw file or during post processing ?
3.80mm post processed
3.97mm post processed
3.80 raw
3.97 raw
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2016
- Messages
- 3,920
- Reaction score
- 2,623
Why are the photos from that 3.8 lens so much more vivid?? Is the fisheye noticeably less, or almost gone with the 3.8? It's hard to tell in the pictures and video.
My 5.4 does fit in the underwater housing. It's a tight fit with the lens flange right against the housing front, but it closes and seals. I have had it underwater and it stayed dry.
because the 3.80mm is in GoPro 3+
in GoPro 3+ there is no option in settings to change Color to "flat" for photos
(I have the latest firmware installed)
unlike GoPro 4 where you have separate protune option for video and another for photo, in GoPro 3+ there is only one general Protune settings and while it's set to "flat", it only affects videos but not the photos.
the photos above are not to compare colour information, that's irrelevant and you can change that in post, I'm comparing sharpness/softness/clarity/distortion - doesn't matter what the colour says, I should've made it B&W...
those photos above are not post-processed (other than resized - with same settings), that's exactly how it came out of the camera.
pictures with the tower are actually 100% crop so the pixel per pixel information is identical as in the original raw photo
Last edited:
very minor distortion still there, yes, hardly noticeable. I didn't correct distortion so the examples are as it is. I wouldn't call it fisheye distortion though.
according to specs for this lens, distortion is less than 2.8%
no VAT.
only forgot to mention that if paid through Paypal then they charge additional 4.4% on the total to recover their Paypal fees, but I suppose if you paid by Western Union or bank transfer then the fee would be even higher.
then that is not a fair comparison, btw I think something is wrong with your 3.97.
those pictures are pretty poor compared to what most other people are getting out of that lens.
not saying the 3.8 is not a great lens. I may get one for my 3 Black. But either you got a bad one, or the apples to oranges comparison is not a good test
those pictures are pretty poor compared to what most other people are getting out of that lens.
not saying the 3.8 is not a great lens. I may get one for my 3 Black. But either you got a bad one, or the apples to oranges comparison is not a good test
Pyrate,
Really? I get the color thing but what are you seeing that gives you that impression? I thought the comparisons were pretty thorough. I'm really just trying to learn as I don't have the experience that some of you do.
Jerry
